Ken Caldeira works for the Department of Global Ecology for the Carnegie Institute of Washington. Before I get ahead of myself, you should also know that Mr. Caldeira attended a conference with other internationally recognized geo-engineers who were discussing something that many of us still deny exist – chemtrails. Mr. Caldeira used to work on ocean acidification, but now he is in the business of studying weather weaponry. Of course that’s not what he calls it, nor do other geoengineers, but a rose of any other name. . . to quote Shakespeare.
In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Caldeira tries to explain why ‘geoengineering schemes might work.’ Is it possible that scientists who have been seeded with Rockefeller and Rothschild money might actually believe they are doing good?
“Scratching the veneer of some of the major climate change movers and shakers one finds a very well-financed assemblage of entities with major philanthropic foundation ties. Indeed, the Rockefeller Foundations alone are major players behind the anthropogenic global warming “activism” and propaganda. For example, in 2009 the Rockefeller Family Foundation gave $3,500,000 to Grace Communications Fund, an organization that “builds partnerships and develops innovative media strategies that increase public awareness of the relationships among food, water, and energy systems.”
Also in 2009 Rockefeller gave $775,000 to the Natural Resource Defense Council, whose foremost agenda is “curbing global warming” and “creating a clean energy future.” Another $650,000 was channeled to the World Wildlife Federation, $350,000 to the Center for Climate Strategies, and $200,000 to the Sierra Club.”
So, are these scientists truly in the interest of fighting global warming, or are they just puppets? To be fair, Caldeira says he was wrongly portrayed in a recent work called SuperFreakonomics, as were the prospects — and pitfalls — of plans to engineer the planet’s climate system. In trying to ‘save’ our climate, are government agencies looking at people dying and showing up with neurological disease as ‘externalities?’ How does spraying the entire world with carcinogenic chemicals without their consent amount to anything less than genocide?
In a healthy discourse on this subject, Amy Worthington of healthfreedominfo writes:
“Congressional hearings of 1975, 1977 and 1994 confirm in nauseating detail that our illustrious Department of Death has used the American population as hapless guinea pigs since WWII. Rutgers professor Leonard Cole collected from U.S. military records a horrifying list of biological and chemical agents furtively tested on American and Canadian civilian populations. In 1999, Jonathan Moreno of Clinton’s Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, also confirmed in his book Undue Risk decades of murderous military-intelligence experimentation on civilians without their knowledge or consent.”
In SuperFreakonomics, Nobel prize winner Paul Crutzen, a Dutch atmospheric scientist, was quoted. According to Levitt and Dubner, the authors, Crutzen stated that injecting sulfur in the atmosphere “is the only option available to rapidly reduce temperature rises and counteract other climatic effects.” That still doesn’t make it a smart thing to do – I don’t care how many Nobel prizes you’ve been given.
Caldeira even admits in this video, that “they [chemtrails] are likely to cause some damage in someplaces.” Other scientists in the video admit that potentially 2 million people could be ‘food-disrupted’ by monsoons, and other freakish weather patterns caused by chemtrails. . .some damage in some places. Why are these engineers allowed to continue this chemical mass spraying? Sure, it’s a slow death, but we all stand in denial of its occurrence.
What will it take to convince you?